“percentage completion method”

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd .(Successor to M/S Sahajanad Hi-Tech Construction Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny. 04. The learned Assessing Officer noted that assessee is following percentage completion method ofaccounting for real estate projects. It has borrowed capital for the business and has paid interest of ₹43.02 crores and earned interest income of ₹31.71 crores resulting into ... deduction only in the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax. In the instant case, the assessee is following percentage completion method (POCM) and therefore the judgment of Wall Street constructions Ltd. is not applicable to this case. The assessee is following percentage completion and offers

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny. 04. The learned Assessing Officer noted that assessee is following percentage completion method ofaccounting for real estate projects. It has borrowed capital for the business and has paid interest of ₹43.02 crores and earned interest income of ₹31.71 crores resulting into ... deduction only in the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax. In the instant case, the assessee is following percentage completion method (POCM) and therefore the judgment of Wall Street constructions Ltd. is not applicable to this case. The assessee is following percentage completion and offers

Macrotech Developers Ltd(Successor to Bellissimo Developers Thane Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3) (Formerly Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(2)), Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny. 04. The learned Assessing Officer noted that assessee is following percentage completion method ofaccounting for real estate projects. It has borrowed capital for the business and has paid interest of ₹43.02 crores and earned interest income of ₹31.71 crores resulting into ... deduction only in the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax. In the instant case, the assessee is following percentage completion method (POCM) and therefore the judgment of Wall Street constructions Ltd. is not applicable to this case. The assessee is following percentage completion and offers

DCIT, CC 8(2), Mumbai vs. Skyline Prashasti, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailita Nos.1964/Mum/2021 (A.Y.2013-14) M/S Skyline Prashasti Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As M/S Sky Star) Income Tax-Cc-8(2) Skyline Oasis, Premier 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Road, Nr. Vidyavihar Aaykar Bhawan, Station, Ghatkoper (W) Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai – 400086 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Abcfs0618M Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2451/Mum/2021 (A.Y.2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Skyline Prashasti Income Tax-Cc-8(2) Skyline Oasis, Premier 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Road, Vidyavihar (W) Aaykar Bhawan, Mumbai – 400086 Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Abcfs0618M Appellant .. Respondent

erred in accepting the contention of the assessee that since the asssessee is a real estate developer the revised AS-7 prescribing percentage completion method is not applicable and the AS-9 which provides for project Completion method is applicable. 2. On the facts and circumstance of the case ... erred in deleting the addition of Rs.17,12,054/- made by the assessing officer applying percentage completion method (Revised AS-7) by taking net profit percentage after depreciation @ 8% of the work in progress. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting

M/S. Skyline Prashaasti, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailita Nos.1964/Mum/2021 (A.Y.2013-14) M/S Skyline Prashasti Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As M/S Sky Star) Income Tax-Cc-8(2) Skyline Oasis, Premier 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Road, Nr. Vidyavihar Aaykar Bhawan, Station, Ghatkoper (W) Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai – 400086 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Abcfs0618M Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2451/Mum/2021 (A.Y.2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Skyline Prashasti Income Tax-Cc-8(2) Skyline Oasis, Premier 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Road, Vidyavihar (W) Aaykar Bhawan, Mumbai – 400086 Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Abcfs0618M Appellant .. Respondent

erred in accepting the contention of the assessee that since the asssessee is a real estate developer the revised AS-7 prescribing percentage completion method is not applicable and the AS-9 which provides for project Completion method is applicable. 2. On the facts and circumstance of the case ... erred in deleting the addition of Rs.17,12,054/- made by the assessing officer applying percentage completion method (Revised AS-7) by taking net profit percentage after depreciation @ 8% of the work in progress. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting

Addl CIT RG 7(1), Mumbai vs. Peninsula Land Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Mumbai ["the AO"] in re- computing Long Term Capital Gains on sale of Land recognized by the Appellant based on percentage completion method on land converted into stock in trade at Rs. 33,86,23,237/- applying the values as per DVO's report instead ... erred in deleting the profit of Ashok Tower Project estimated by the Assessing Officer at Rs.45,12,96,704/-, by observing that the percentage completion method followed consistently by the appellant cannot be rejected without appreciating the contention of the Assessing Officer discussed in detail in assessment order

Peninsula Land Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Mumbai ["the AO"] in re- computing Long Term Capital Gains on sale of Land recognized by the Appellant based on percentage completion method on land converted into stock in trade at Rs. 33,86,23,237/- applying the values as per DVO's report instead ... erred in deleting the profit of Ashok Tower Project estimated by the Assessing Officer at Rs.45,12,96,704/-, by observing that the percentage completion method followed consistently by the appellant cannot be rejected without appreciating the contention of the Assessing Officer discussed in detail in assessment order

Olive Spaces, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -27, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singholive Spaces Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of 1St Floor, Jeevan Deep, Income Tax-27, Building No.Ii, Opp. Room No. 401, 4 Th Floor, Bank Of Baroda, Tower No.6, Vashi Rajawadi, Ghatkoper, Railway Station East, Mumbai – 400077 Commercial Complex, Vashi, New Mumbai - 400703 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aacfo2135N Appellant .. Respondent

shown any profit. ITA No.520/Mum/2021 A.Y.2016-17 3 Olive Spaces Vs. Pr.CIT-27 The Pr. CIT further stated that assessee has followed percentage completion method, however on the completion of the project during A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 there was a loss and neither service tax return nor agreement

DCIT 27(1), Mumbai vs. Gopuram Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Rs.5,93,35,636/- being profit determined on the project undertaken by the assessee, failing to appreciate that the assessee was following percentage completion method of accounting and the AO had worked out the profits accordingly in para 4.5 of the assessment order 2) Whether on the facts and circumstances ... initiated separately. 5 DCIT27(1) 6. On further appeal, before the Ld. FAA the assessee mainly submitted that it was consistently following percentage completion method and profit had been offered to tax as and when it was accrued to the assessee. The Ld. FAA after in considering submission

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd (Successor to M/S Lodha Impression Real Estate Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

deduction only in the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax. In the instant case, the assessee is following percentage completion method (POCM) and therefore the judgment of Wall Street constructions Ltd. is not applicable to this case. The assessee is following percentage completion and offers

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd(Successor to M/S Lodha Impression Real Estate Pvt Ltd)., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

deduction only in the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax. In the instant case, the assessee is following percentage completion method (POCM) and therefore the judgment of Wall Street constructions Ltd. is not applicable to this case. The assessee is following percentage completion and offers

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Mmr Social Housing Pvt Ltd (Earlier Know As M/S Lodha Buildcon Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

deduction only in the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax. In the instant case, the assessee is following percentage completion method (POCM) and therefore the judgment of Wall Street constructions Ltd. is not applicable to this case. The assessee is following percentage completion and offers

ACIT 1 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Dosti Realty Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shr Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7374/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Dosti Realty Ltd. (Formally Known As Friends Income Tax-1(1)(1), Development Corporation 579,Ayankar Bhavan, M.K बिधम/ (Imperia) Pvt. Ltd. Road, Mumbai-400020, 276,1St Floor, Lawrence & Vs. Mayo House, Mumbai - 400001, स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aabcf5801A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P.R. Rastogi, Ld. Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Dr.K.Shivaram & Rahul Hakani, Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 14.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 06.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 19.09.2019, Passed By Ld. Cit (Appeals)-2, Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) For Ay 2014-2015. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:-

selling of the property which was only project in progress. The assessee has disclosed 51.6% of the project and since assessee following the percentage completion method, therefore, according to him, he allowed the deduction of 51.6% of brokerage expenses, i.e., Rs. 31,45,213/- and balance brokerage expenses ... regards the disallowance of Rs.100,00,884/-, Ld. CIT(A) observed that the same is not correct considering that as per the percentage completion method the direct and indirect cost which are related directly to construction and development of the project activities should have been considered towards allocation against revenue

DCIT CC 7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned AO is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

decision of the Wall Street construction does not apply to the facts of the case for the reason that assessee is following percentage completion method and not project completion method. He was also of the view that ITA no. 1539 & 1594/Mum/2019 Lodha Developers Ltd; A.Y. 15–16 this issue also ... learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned assessing officer and submitted that as the assessee is following the percentage completion method, the above interest should form part of work in progress and as soon as part of revenue is offered for taxation assessee is entitled to claim

Lodha Developers Ltd.(Successor to Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned AO is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

decision of the Wall Street construction does not apply to the facts of the case for the reason that assessee is following percentage completion method and not project completion method. He was also of the view that ITA no. 1539 & 1594/Mum/2019 Lodha Developers Ltd; A.Y. 15–16 this issue also ... learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned assessing officer and submitted that as the assessee is following the percentage completion method, the above interest should form part of work in progress and as soon as part of revenue is offered for taxation assessee is entitled to claim

Addl.C.I.T. RG. 7(1), Mumbai vs. Peninsula Land Ltd., Mumbai

Assessee and re-calculated the business income arising from the project „Ashok Towers‟ by following his own method as opposed to the percentage completion method followed which was being consistently followed by the Assessee. The Assessing Officer computed business income, being profit on sale of land